Earlier today, the Anaheim Ducks signed Andrew Cogliano to a three-year contract worth $2.39 million per season. Lowetide’s take on it is here, and he makes a quick comment on the Oilogosphere in the piece:

As an aside, if Steve Tambellini had signed this contract, I suspect Oiler Nation would be rushing to the internet to express their displeasure at the signing.

I think that deserves comment.

First off, I think it’s worth comparing the Cogliano contract to a couple of others. Ideally, these contracts would be to restricted free agent forwards, the players would be about the same age, and ideally they’d be signed this summer. Fortunately, we have two such examples to look at: Blake Wheeler and Michael Frolik.

Blake Wheeler: Two years, $2.55 million cap hit

Andrew Cogliano: Three years, $2.39 million cap hit

Michael Frolik: Three years, $2.33 million cap hit

How do those players compare, given that their age, status and contract situations are all similar?

Cogliano scored 45 points as a rookie, and recorded 18 goals each of his first two seasons – thanks to a shooting percentage more than twice as high as he’s recorded in either of the last two seasons (where he’s scored 10 and 11 goals respectively). The question is whether his first two seasons or the last two seasons better represent his NHL ability; given the fact that recent results deserve more weight and that Cogliano’s shooting percentage was insanely good the first two years, I’d bet on the latter. If that’s the case, than while Cogliano’s game has come along, offensively he’s not likely to be a game-breaker. Over the last two seasons, he’s scored 1.39 and 1.33 points for every 60 minutes of 5-on-5 play.

Blake Wheeler, on the other hand, has scored 18, 18 and 21 goals over the last three years. His goal-scoring the last two years hasn’t been attributable to shooting percentage, and while he’s played a somewhat similar role to Cogliano on the depth chart (i.e. complementary forward) he’s been a far better scorer, topping the 2.00 points per 60 mark two of the last three seasons (including 2010-11, where he managed 2.20 points per 60).

Michael Frolik is far and away the most complete player of the three. He’s recorded between 38 and 45 points over the last three years. In two of the last three years, he’s topped the 20-goal plateau; last year he finished with 11 goals thanks to a massive drop in shooting percentage (an 8.4% career shooter, Frolik scored at just a 4.4% clip last season). He played on a tough minutes line with Stephen Weiss and Nathan Horton as a sophomore, and saw an unusual amount of quality opponents with Weiss as a rookie. He recorded 1.73 points per 60 last season, and while he’s not the scorer that Wheeler is, he’s better than Cogliano.

In short: Anaheim probably overpaid for Cogliano, relative to the market. Other restricted free agents in the same age range but with a better track record got almost identical dollars and terms, and while Cogliano might grow into the contract he probably isn’t there yet.

The dollar figure on Cogliano’s new contract makes Steve Tambellini look better for trading him. We might present it as a choice, one between Eric Belanger and a second round pick as well as roughly $700,000 in savings, or Andrew Cogliano. Given that Belanger’s the better player, cheaper, was available at no cost other than money, and most importantly fits team needs better, that’s a great choice.

Even so, on a rebuilding team, it may not have been an easy one to make. Trading Cogliano is a risk; he’s young, has scored in the past, has blazing speed and rarely left anyone questioning his effort level. He’s also been exceptionally durable.

Personally, I think it’s a smart risk. The Oilers have, in the past, been reluctant to sever ties with far worse players than Cogliano. Steve Tambellini made a smart choice here, and given that I’d be criticizing the signing (had he made it), it’s only fair that I acknowledge his strong asset management in this instance.

Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer.
He currently works for Oilers Nation, Sportsnet, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report.
He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.

Remember that time your team won the president's trophy and raised the banner before the season ended? Remember when they then lost in the finals because your albatross goalie cant hack the pressure? Remember?

My cousins live on the island and are huge Canuck fans. They were pretty excited in September that this was the year. I agreed. Everything was aligning for this to be Vancouver's year.

A lot of your guys had career years. Luongo was Vezina calibre during the regular season, you have an Art Ross trophy, and everything seemed to roll along favourably for you.

But you guys chocked. Hard. As hard as anyone has choked in the post-lockout NHL. Next year and beyond, most of your guys won't have career years like they just did. It's unlikely that you'll have as easy a time walking through Chicago and San Jose next year, not to mention dealing with the up-and-coming LA.

I think your opportunity came and passed. In a couple of years we'll have our shot. But enjoy your President's trophy and Western Conference Championship because it's all you've got to show for it.*

*Not to mention piles of shattered glass and fans of legendary ill-repute.

Ya non-affordable to people from Edmonton. Ya there is traffic, because many people want to move here, so ya traffic will occur and there's things to do here... on that note...how is your mall?? still around? I thought they would have torn it down to build another dingy factory. People flock to Vancouver cuz we da best!

Maybe I wasn't clear. I live in Greater Van now - and have so for a year. After 6 months it gets old... actually it sucks.

Not really. This team really has been terrible for years. If that hurts anybody's feeling then they really have drank too much Kool-Aid.

At least you have that Western Conference Championship banner to look at. Come to think of it, we got ourselves one of those not too long ago either. The only difference is that nobody HERE thinks that's an accomplishment worth celebrating.

If you're judging the worth (or lack of) this contract based on past performance, should you not also be taking into account the linemates Cogliano has had the past two years?

I bet you'd find Wheeler and Frolik had far superior support than Cogliano. And I'd also bet his new employers are thinking the same thing too.

The problem with the Oilers is that for whatever reason, they've decided it's OK to break in a half dozen prospects and junior players at once. Cogliano developed properly would have been teamed with actual decent NHL'ers. Here he was given scrubs and rejects more often than not, which I'll wager hindered his development by killing his confidence.

The Ducks are making the bet that Cogliano with a new lease on his career and supported by a team philosophy that actually has winning as its primary objective will turn into the guy he was supposed to be here.

Not really. This team really has been terrible for years. If that hurts anybody's feeling then they really have drank too much Kool-Aid.

At least you have that Western Conference Championship banner to look at. Come to think of it, we got ourselves one of those not too long ago either. The only difference is that nobody HERE thinks that's an accomplishment worth celebrating.

Playoffs wean out officials in training. The quality officials will punish hockey teams that try to cheat dive. I.E. Don't embarrass an official, in any sport. Not only won't you get the dive, you won't get a legit call either.

Holy cow, did VanFan1 really say his team has one, (let alone three) players who are better than Datsyuk, or Crosby, or Ovy, or Lidstrom, or Thomas?

But would you pay more for the abilities of Wheeler, Frolik or Cogliano, given that all are young complementary forwards and all paid roughly the same?

They aren't the same kind of player, but they play remarkably similar minutes and I'd much rather send out the first two than Cogliano.

If I had to overpay two of those 3 players, I'd pick Wheeler and Frokik, but I'm not entirely sure what the point/question was - I'm giddishly tired right now, and I'm questioning why the heII I'm still up.

Totally agree with Lowetide. If Tambo did this deal it would be a Monty Python Witch Burning within 5 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

This contract is more of the Ducks rewarding Cogliano for the player they hope he becomes, not the player he is today. As for the Oilers, we have done enough of this in the past. Probably turns out to be a good decision for both the Oilers and the Ducks.

The move had to be made with one of our forwards, and based on the price Cogs was asking for, and the term, this move makes sense. The term would have brought his bloated salary (at this point) into the year when he need to re-up our young stars. That could have caused potential problems, and given the choices I would way rather save room for them instead of an underwhelming former top pick. Not bashing Cogs, but he didn't turn into a world-beater as a 1st round pick. Instead of calling him Marchant 'with hands' as he was originally cast, we were left to hoping he 'turned into' a Marchant-type.

I do wish Cogs all the best with his new team; hopefully he can cover Anaheim's bet. Personally, I'm glad we kept Gilbert Brule instead. I think he has bigger upside, hits a ton, and if he does get healthy one day we've got ourselves a real solid player there... and a complete player, at that!

(As a side note it's interesting to see the kid line from four years ago and how they have fared now...I was hoping for big things from the young Nilsson, as I had grown up cheering for his dad back in the day!)

dawgbone, where was he going to play. What wing was he going to play on. He was a 3rd/ 4rth liner on the worst hockey team in the league. The Oilers were not going to pay him more then 1.5-1.8 per, which Tambo would of got roasted for if had he signed him for anywhere close to what an arbitrator was going to award him. They knew the marketplace and that in arbitration he would be awarded anywhere from 1.8-2.5 and they said lets get what we can, we got more complete players then Cogliano on the roster and waiting in the wings.

He`s terrible on the PP, because hes a player who scores on the rush, bad on PK because he can`t win draws. He`s a excellent even strength hockey player where most of his points are scored. The Oilers gave him 2 plus years to develop into a 3rd liner and at the end he plateau`d. The Oilers knew what Cogliano would bring the team They also know they can`t win with too many diminutive forwards, so they turned the page and they are a better hockey now.

The Oilers got Belanger to replace him, who is a better overall hockey player, and fills the Malholtra void, plus they got a second round pick. I call that good asset management, and we did not have to pay a guy 2.4 mil to loose faceoffs all year, and be our 10-12th forward.

Arbitrator: This player is worth the value of pi multiplied by the surface area of the ocean on a windy night. If you need a second calculation we can factor in his shot totals and the number of albums Janis Joplin sold in 1968.

General Manager: You're all crazy. If I want this kind of abuse, I can go home to my wife. Have fun in free agency, Kid. Get your locker cleaned out by 5:00 today and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

I kind of agree with you. We spent four years turning him into the pro that he is just to flip him for another question mark that we'll have to develop.

But that's the reality of the CBA. You get 6 or 7 years to determine whether you want to retain a player for big bucks, or you can cash out early for another spin of the wheel.

I think Asset Management the right term here. Cogs could've been signed to a 2-year deal, played 4th line minutes, and walked as a UFA in 2013. Instead ST acknowledged that there wasn't a place for him given our plethora of wingers who slot ahead of him, and cashed him out.

I kind of agree with you. We spent four years turning him into the pro that he is just to flip him for another question mark that we'll have to develop.

But that's the reality of the CBA. You get 6 or 7 years to determine whether you want to retain a player for big bucks, or you can cash out early for another spin of the wheel.

I think Asset Management the right term here. Cogs could've been signed to a 2-year deal, played 4th line minutes, and walked as a UFA in 2013. Instead ST acknowledged that there wasn't a place for him given our plethora of wingers who slot ahead of him, and cashed him out.

It also isn't very hard to pick up "Cogliano's" for nothing on the FA market.

We just picked up a superior Cogs for nothing (asset wise) and traded our inferior Cogliano for a decent asset.

dawgbone, where was he going to play. What wing was he going to play on. He was a 3rd/ 4rth liner on the worst hockey team in the league. The Oilers were not going to pay him more then 1.5-1.8 per, which Tambo would of got roasted for if had he signed him for anywhere close to what an arbitrator was going to award him. They knew the marketplace and that in arbitration he would be awarded anywhere from 1.8-2.5 and they said lets get what we can, we got more complete players then Cogliano on the roster and waiting in the wings.

He`s terrible on the PP, because hes a player who scores on the rush, bad on PK because he can`t win draws. He`s a excellent even strength hockey player where most of his points are scored. The Oilers gave him 2 plus years to develop into a 3rd liner and at the end he plateau`d. The Oilers knew what Cogliano would bring the team They also know they can`t win with too many diminutive forwards, so they turned the page and they are a better hockey now.

The Oilers got Belanger to replace him, who is a better overall hockey player, and fills the Malholtra void, plus they got a second round pick. I call that good asset management, and we did not have to pay a guy 2.4 mil to loose faceoffs all year, and be our 10-12th forward.

Left Wingers who are better than Cogliano: Smyth, Hall

Right Wingers who are better than Cogliano: Hemsky, Eberle

You can add Paajarvi and Omark to that group as well, though with Paajarvi that's more to do with potential than actually being a better player.

He's actually been one of the Oilers best players on the PK, despite his inability to win a draw (which he wouldn't have to take because he wouldn't be a centre any longer). And if he's an excellent even strength player (like you suggested), that's the exact reason why you keep him. Guys who can play at ES and kill penalties still hold a lot of value.

Yes, the Oilers brought in Belanger... but they've needed a Belanger since the idiotic Brodziak trade. They've needed another centre for years. That doesn't mean you add that centre and dump other players.

And this contract issue would have been avoided if they were smart enough to trade Brule last year instead of signing him to a ridiculous contract. I'd rather have Cogs at 1.8-2.0 than Brule.

I see what you're saying, but the issue here is that I don't think it's clear that Cogliano was willing to play on the wing. Gregor's made that comment a couple of times, and without knowledge to the contrary I tend to take his word for it.

At centre, I prefer the current trio (10, 89 and Belanger) to Cogliano and suspect that in terms of fourth line performance relative to dollars spent the team is better off with Lander than Cogliano. And all that assumes RNH doesn't make the team, which he might.

I don't think you can make an assessment of any of these guys except Eager and Hordi. I think Eager and Cogs are such different players, you can't really compare them. For the role eager serves he is pretty damn good and cogs couldn't come close but you can also reverse that. And lets face it Hordi is an enforcer and Cogs isn't. Completely different purpose on the team. The other three however we haven't see play an entire season yet so we don't really have any comparision yet. I think all three have a chance at being better but only time will tell.

I think you certainly can make a pretty accyrat assessment of all of them, with maybe Lander being the one unique player.

CVV is the same age as Cogliano and is well behind him developmentally speaking. Cogs was doing the samething as an NCAA freshman as CVV was doing as a Senior. CVV struggled at the AHL level for most of the year last year.

Hartikainen is a decent prospect, but I think even his biggest fans will admit he's still another couple of years from being an NHL regular.

Lander is a bit of a wild card in that he's still pretty young and has played in a pretty good league the past few years, but using Paajarvi as a high benchmark that puts him behind Cogliano sitll.

I'm also not talking about the role of a player on the team (because personally speaking, the role Hordichuk fills is a useless one), but actually ability to play hockey.

If the 6 players you have on the ice are better players than the 6 the other team have you are going to come out ahead. Just get as many good players as you can afford throughout your lineup and you'll be a good team.

Wouldn't matter the gagners can't play good defensive hockey even if you have Bulin in net for both i would still bet money on 5 bruins. Also part of thomas's success in net was the bruins defensive play. They blocked a lot of shots, cleared the shooting lanes for thomas, kept a lot to the outside and limited the allowed shots from in close. Thomas even said it him self the team did a good job of making sure he could see the puck to make the stops and clearing rebounds.

Faceoffs is a small thing that can be very important. Winning faceoffs increases your puck possession time, the more time you have with the puck the more likely you are to have shots on goal and/or clear the zone to limit shots for the other team. Its all the little things together that make a winning team

I'd take a trio of Gagners over Thornton - Campbell - Paille every day of the week. In fact that's the type of matchups a coach who is trying to win a game would look for with a trio of young players.

Yes, part of Thomas's success was that the Bruins played well in front of him, but he put up a .967 sv% in the finals, which is pretty remarkable. In terms of "dangerous" shots (shots from the prime scoring area), the Bruins won the battle 109-104 over the course of the 7 game series. That's not much of an advantage and doesn't separate these teams nearly as much as the respective goaltenders save % does.

Face-offs have their place, but the fact of the matter is they have very little outcome on the game. 7 of the top 16 face-off teams didn't make the playoffs last year, so the correlation between face-offs and winning is marginal at best. Now, that being said if there was an in-zone face-off with 5 seconds left in a 1 goal game, you'd want your best guy taking it... but that's situation specific and doesn't take into account the rest of the game.